Advertisement:

Two "mystery" candidates added to the Cubs managerial candidate list

Two "mystery" candidates added to the Cubs managerial candidate list

Gordon Wittenmeyer wrote an article today that suggests the Cubs have at least 7 candidates for the Cubs managing job.  There really is no information on who that may be and maybe that's a good thing.  After watching Manny Acta and A.J. Hinch get skewered by some in the media, maybe the Cubs are better off silencing the background noise on this.

Other than Acta and Hinch, the confirmed candidates are Rick Renteria, Dave Martinez, and Torey Lovullo

As for the mystery candidates, we can only speculate, but Wittenmeyer does say who it won't be...

The only thing certain about the identities of the two mystery candidates is they’re not Jim Leyland, Don Mattingly, Cardinals third-base coach Jose Oquendo, Indians first-base coach Sandy Alomar, Rangers pitching coach Mike Maddux or any in-house coaches from Dale Sveum’s staff.

UPDATE: Patrick Mooney of CSN crosses a few names more names off the list.  They are as follows... (Ones not already mentioned in bold)

  • Three candidates who interviewed two years ago are not in play this time: Blue Jays bench coach DeMarlo Hale; Texas Rangers pitching coach Mike Maddux; and Cleveland Indians first-base coach Sandy Alomar Jr.
  •  You can cross off five more names talked about in industry circles: Red Sox special assistant Jason Varitek; Yankees bench coach Tony Pena; Cardinals third-base coach Jose Oquendo; Rangers hitting coach Dave Magadan; and Oakland A’s bench coach Chip Hale.

No surprises there, though I would also add Dusty Baker to that "no" list.  Ozzie Guillen has been mentioned locally but that also seems extremely unlikely.  One thing we can say about Guillen is that he's a player's manager and can communicate with young Latin American players.  He'll definitely deflect attention and take pressure off the kids, but I just can't imagine that the Cubs front office has him in mind.

As to who it might actually be, we can only speculate.  I mentioned a while back that Tony Pena would be an interesting candidate but haven't found anything to suggest that he is.  We've also brought up names like Boston 3B coach Brian Butterfield, former Pirates manager John Russell, and Athletics coach Chip Hale, but was not able to confirm any of those names either.

So who else is out there?

I can also dig up my old list from when they hired Dale Sveum two years ago.  After all, I had Rick Renteria back then and forgot to add him for this year's list -- and he is now officially a candidate.  Tim Bogar is another one.  He is analytics friendly, has worked for the Red Sox and under Joe Maddon.  Here's what I said about him back then,

Bogar is, of course, connected with Epstein and is considered one of the top up and coming managerial candidates in the game right now.  As a minor league manager with the Indians organization, he came within one game of winning a title and was named Eastern League Manager of the Year in 2006.  He was also selected to manage the U.S. in the Futures All-Star Game in 2006 and 2007.  Additionally, Baseball America called him the best managerial candidate in Eastern League in 2006.  Because of his connections with both the Indians and Red Sox, he may be considered to take over for Terry Francona.

A guy who worked under both of Theo Epstein's final two candidates for his original job.  I have to think his name was brought up at some point.

There's also DeMarlo Hale, who interviewed for the Nationals job.  Hale makes sense for a lot of reasons.  He had a lot of success as a minor league manager and coach with the Red Sox, so the Cubs front office is very familiar with him.  He's also a native Chicagoan, so he understands the culture here.  Here's what I wrote about Hale,

Hale was Francona's right hand man in Boston as their bench coach.  Like Bogar, he is familiar with Epstein and the Red Sox philosophy.  As a bonus, he also has some local connections as he is from Chicago and attended Chicago Vocational High Schoool.  On the field, Hale has been a coach for the past 10 years with the Rangers and Red Sox, two of the game's top organizations.  Before that he managed in Boston's system where his resume may be more impressive than Sandberg's.  While he had many winning seasons, Hale's best year may have been when he guided Trenton to a best-league 92-50 record in 1999.  That season he also coached the U.S.team in the All-Star Futures game.  He was honored as Minor League Manager of the Year by Baseball America, the Sporting News and USA Today Weekly.

For what it's worth, the Nationals have also interviewed Matt Williams, Randy Knorr, and Brad Ausmus.  Ausmus has drawn some support locally in Chicago and is said to be an excellent baseball mind and a player first type.  Peter Gammons was the first to bring him up and we talked about him then.

We've heard about Alex Cora, but what about Joey Cora?  He's bilingual, he's known as a good communicator, he's familiar with Chicago (including a stint as coach of the Cubs).  He's been on Ozzie Guillen's staff so we know he can handle all kinds of personalities and drama.  He's worked with the Marlins, so we know he's worked with young players.  He's intelligent and more of a tough love guy than a nice guy, which some fans here in Chicago would like.  And of all the managers who'd bring in Alex as a coach (something Bruce Levine said the Cubs would highly recommend), you'd think Joey would be a slam dunk to add him to his staff.

I don't want to rule out Tony Pena. I was told he is a good motivator and works well with young players.  He's also bilingual, comes from a winning organization that has become increasingly stat friendly.  He has experience as a manager, including a successful year with Kansas City, and has worked in a big market in New York.  A lot of things fit here.

Another interesting name is Jason Varitek  (h/t Bryan/Michael) I don't know if he's  a candidate or not but he's an intelligent baseball guy and a strong leader who is well respected by the front office.

Can't get a confirmation on Pena or anyone on this list for that matter, but hey -- this is a mystery list after all, right?

 

Filed under: Uncategorized

Comments

Leave a comment
  • fb_avatar

    I am so sick of this managerial search. No matter who the Cubs pick, people will either hate it or love it. The fact is, we have no way of really knowing how well the new Cubs manager will do. So lets just get it done and move on. Not a shot at you John, you have covered this very well. However, I would rather be talking about players than coaches.

  • In reply to Demarrer:

    True, but new manager is the priority right now. Cubs aren't going to be acquiring any players until after that happens. In fact, we can't even be sure right now who will be available.

  • fb_avatar

    hale, bogar - again with the Boston connections. I just don't get why they wouldn't open their minds to other organizations. Theo Epstein and Jed Hoyer are on a first name basis with 29 GM's whom they could call and pick their brains - but they seem to constantly retreat to their comfort zones of coaches they have somehow worked with before. They wouldn't limit themselves that way with trades and free agents, why do it with the manager? Any business that continues that sort of inbreeding in its leadership positions is going to be stunted in its success.

  • In reply to SKMD:

    It's not just familiarity with them. It's an easy fit philosophically and makes the communication easier. It's a smaller learning curve.

  • fb_avatar

    which worked out so well in the case of Dale Sveum.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to SKMD:

    sorry, that was a reply to john

  • In reply to SKMD:

    So it will never, ever work again. And as I've said many times, I don't think it was not knowing Sveum so much as it was they didn't know the Cubs organization and what it needed.

  • fb_avatar

    we've debated how ridiculous it is to include "must not have slept with team-mate's wife" as a criterion for selection - now we have to add "must have worked for us or for one of our old teams at some point"? How equally ridiculous is that? Seriously, if your boss at work was looking for a new manager and that was one of his starting premises, wouldn't you think it was a little nuts?

  • In reply to SKMD:

    No.

  • In reply to SKMD:

    Actually, outside of baseball big companies look to promote for within before they hire from outside and this applies to most companies about there.

    Some other organizations only hire people based on that "familiarity" thing... If/when they go outside, they only hire those referred from some of their best employees... I could even name a few, but that's not necessary.

    Personally, I rather hire somebody I've worked with and know well and is on the same page as me than to go outside and hire a question mark.

    What happened with Sveum is even more likely to happen when you have never worked with the individual... It takes more than 1-2 interviews to truly get to know someone.

  • In reply to Caps:

    I meant to say they look to promote "from within".

  • In reply to Caps:

    Exactly. If anything, it's more ridiculous not to look at candidates that you've trained and developed as part of the list.

    There's also the consideration that you can only learn so much from interviews and recommendations. Sometimes you get the best information by actually having worked with the person.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Caps:

    OK, I have to disagree with both of you guys. I'd rather have the company I work for go out and find the best guy available, not the guy that's the coziest with the CEO.
    And it because it didn't work with Sveum doesn't mean it'll never work again, but it does mean that maybe you should rethink the premise that past familiarity should be very high on your list of selection criteria. Sure, if you have a guy in mind you've worked with in the past that you think will fit, of course you should go with him. But to ONLY mine your past contacts for new hires - sorry, I don't think any successful company does that.

  • In reply to SKMD:

    If you are a CEO and you develop a particular philosophy and culture, invest in the training and development of your employees, you tell me you wouldn't consider them for an opening? Especially when those same employees have since been hired and been successful in other organizations? And also when those same employees are being interviewed by other organizations?

    But you're going to pass them up because you feel you need to hire from the outside and take a chance on a guy you only know from other people's recommendations and a few hours of interviews?

    It makes zero sense that some of them wouldn't be on your list. You can look around to other organizations, which the Cubs have, but you're also going to look at guys you know already understand your philosophy and culture. You'd be irresponsible not to consider them.

    Nobody says you have to hire them. In fact, my first choice is still Acta -- but you have to consider them.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to John Arguello:

    "If you are a CEO and you develop a particular philosophy and culture, invest in the training and development of your employees, you tell me you wouldn't consider them for an opening?"

    no, I am specifically not saying that. I am not saying ignore your past workers. As I said, if there is someone who you've worked with and fits your opening, then by all means hire them - past familiarity is certainly not a DISqualifier. What I am saying is, open your eyes to the fact that the world doesn't revolve around your past contacts. There are 29 other clubs out there, some of whom know a little bit about winning - but so far about 70% of the names we've heard are connected to the BoSox and Padres.

  • In reply to SKMD:

    It doesn't. As some have pointed out already, there are candidates from outside the organization already as well as a few we've speculated on here. And some of the coaches/minor league managers that have emerged from the Boston organization are some of the best candidates in baseball. They're getting interviews and being hired in other organizations. There's a big pool of talent there.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to John Arguello:

    most of the non-boston/padre names being mentioned are speculation from outside the org, which may in fact indicate the desire by knowledgable people to look elsewhere - most of the names the FO itself has thrown out have been far more insular. Yes, Boston has a huge pool of talent, and I myself mentioned their AAA manager the other day wrt Nick Cafardo's sunday column. But the talent pools in St Louis, LA, Atlanta, Philadelphia, New York ain't chopped liver. They may feel warm and fuzzy and safe by going with only what they know, but by doing that they're depriving themselves of some pretty good resources, some of which - dare I say it - may do things differently from how this FO does it, and yet manage to win games.

    Look, I'm just pointing out that nobody - apparently not even the FO itself, since they're expanding their search - has been thrilled with any of the names we've heard - why not at least take a peak elsewhere?

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to SKMD:

    i gotta go make dinner. Later.

  • In reply to SKMD:

    They have. Honestly, I really don't know what you're arguing about. Their original list was two pages long. And 3 of their final 4 candidates don't have strong ties. Hinch worked just one year with Hoyer. Acta and Martinez haven't worked with them at all. Neither has another potential candidate in Brad Ausmus. The only ones with strong ties that are known candidates are Renteria and Lovullo -- and both are respected throughout the baseball industry.

    And the guys the industry likes most from my info, including a couple guys I've talked to from strong organizations, are Acta and Hinch, but people in Chicago are terrified of them because they had losing records with bad teams.

  • In reply to SKMD:

    Renteria (Marlins/Padres), Hinch (Dbacks/Padres), Acta (Indians/Nats), Martinez (Rays)... I mean, sure they are also linked to a bunch of other teams, but it seems to me like it's more 50% so far... And when these guys are in their 50's, chances are they have worked for many organizations, including Boston and San Diego.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Caps:

    Nothing wrong with interviewing guys you are previously familiar with and nothing wrong with making that a criteria as long as it is not THE criteria. In a perfect world, were two candidates equal, you'd favor the guy you have a previous working relationship with. I run a company and that's what I'd do if I were hiring outside our organization.

  • In reply to SKMD:

    Well, from the guys interviewed, I don't think they have worked with Acta or Dave Martinez... They are just interviewing the guys they have in mind that they know... So far 2 of those guys are Hinch and Renteria... The other 2 are from other organizations... The other guy mentioned is Lovullo who has worked with them in the past... Again, these are just the interviews, I don't see a complete inclination other than taking a look at guys they already know and think highly of.

    It's not a rare occurrence... The Reds just promoted their pitching coach to manager... The Tigers interviewed their hitting coach for the manager opening and have Brad Ausmus (former Tiger) in mind... The Phillies hired Ryne Sandberg (former Phillie) and he hired Larry Bowa (former Phillie and former Cub as well)... The Nationals interviewed their 3B coach for the manager opening and so on and so forth.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Caps:

    just because everyone does it doesn't make it right. Great companies don't ignore their successful competitors' talented workers, they pillage them.

  • In reply to SKMD:

    Great companies also reward the best employees that they have developed and followed their philosophy.

  • In reply to SKMD:

    He listed Ausmis, Cora, and Pena as potential candidates and none of them have ties to the front office so no, that is not part of the criteria to be considered.

  • Pena has been my first choice since Girardi opted for NY.
    I weary of the speculation, but understand that the speculation will persist until the FO speaks..

  • In reply to BLOOMIE1937:

    Honestly, I'm a little weary myself. I want this part over with and I'm always most interested in the players. But the Cubs are in a bit of a holding pattern right now. The next thing they'll do is hire a manager -- and I'm looking forward to the day they finally do

  • In reply to BLOOMIE1937:

    I agree about Pena and I'm wondering why we don't hear more about him. He has every qualification and would be perfect, but surely team Thoyer must know that. SO weary of it all or not, I have to have faith that he is the man, until after the Cards fade again.

  • i like that they are taking their time.

  • In reply to CubfanInUT:

    Me too.

  • In reply to CubfanInUT:

    They are taking their time because they have not found what they are looking for yet. That manager is out there somewhere.

  • Neither Acta or Martinez have previously worked with Theo or Jed, so I think it is not an absolute criteria as some of you are saying.

  • In reply to nmu’catsbball:

    Definitely not an absolute criteria. Obviously they'll consider people they know, but it's only one consideration and certainly not a prerequisite.

  • I am a huge fan of Jed and Theo, but the fact they wont even consider Ozzie Guillen even though he is a proven winner, speaks Spanish, is a players coach, players love playing for him, and he wouldnt deal with all curse of the goat and all the other bs; makes me wonder if Jed and Theo can handle a personality that would outshine them. Maybe the fact that he has a winning record and a World Series championship scares them off. lets go with the managers with no experience or that have the lowest winning percentages of all time. maybe im wrong but it just seems like he would be a great fit as the manager but who am I besides a loyal fan that pays the highest ticket prices in baseball and gets a lousy product.

  • In reply to Joshnk24:

    I would rather have Quade back than that imbecile known as Ozzie.... He got lucky with the White Sox. Don't go giving him too much credit for that ring they won.....

  • In reply to Joshnk24:

    Maybe the same applies to the Tigers, Nats and other teams out there looking for a manager cause I don't think he's getting interviewed by anyone.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Joshnk24:

    You forget to mention he is also a proven imbecile, often an embarassment to his organization, and failed miserably with a team built to win in Miami.

  • Great article, John. It's a lot of fun to speculate, and you seem to have a great handle on who out there are legit candidates, as well as a feel for the Cubs' FO and their tastes. I would think that Pena would be a candidate, but if so I wonder why they haven't interviewed him yet?

    BTW, I was thinking an interesting topic for an article would be the 1970 Cincinnati Reds. Why? Because they won 102 games and an NL pennant with a 36 year old rookie manager, a starting lineup that featured 4 guys age 24 or younger and nobody over the age of 29, a rotation with a 22 and a 21 year old, and a key pen arm who was 19. They also had some young bench guys like Hal McRae who were key contributors, and no regulars older than 29. Of course, they were ridiculously talented (there will probably never be another team quite like them), but they do show that it is possible to win big with a very young team and inexperienced manager.

  • In reply to SVAZCUB:

    Thanks, Svaz. And that is a real interesting idea. Let me look into it.

  • Everything being equal, it never is, I would pick a Hispanic
    because of all the promising top Hispanic prospects come up
    in the next 2-3 years.

  • In reply to emartinezjr:

    There are a lot of good Latin American managers. Maybe a market inefficiency?

  • fb_avatar

    I've always liked DeMarlo Hale, and often considered him when I get into "fantasy GM" mode. I often wondered why he and Ron Wotus are always on the outside looking in. John, what are they lacking in that we baseball fans don't know about? I do like the idea of Lovullo, Bogars, or Hale as the next manager, or Dave Keller as a hire from within if they go that route. I have a hunch Mariano Duncan will be promoted to batting coach regardless who is the manager. And McKay at 1st of course.

  • In reply to Cubsforlife:

    Wotus is a good name too. He seems to get some respect around baseball, but I don't know enough about him to be honest.

    It doesn't look like they're going to hire from within.

  • I think either Bogar or Hale is one of the mystery candidates, as for the other I will just throw one out there. How about Jason Varitek ? He's kind of like Ausmus, with a little less buzz, ex-catcher, smart ect...The one thing he has over Ausmus...the Boston connection.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Steve Flores:

    Varitek is indeed very intriguing but I don't see theo and hoyer bypassing the managerial experience (major or minor) factor.

  • In reply to Cubsforlife:

    Agreed -- and if they do, it will probably be Ausmus.

  • In reply to Steve Flores:

    They seem like solid possibilities. Varitek is interesting but don't see how he's more qualified than Ausmus or Hinch. It'd be a bold move and it would pretty much run counter to most of the criteria they laid out.

  • At the end of the day it doesn't matter one bit who we as fans want, it's who the FO feels the most comfortable with regardless of what organization they come from. Being bilingual is a plus but the manager doesn't need to be as long as someone on the coaching staff is. The thing that I don't care for is all the "mystery" involved in who it is. Are there actually more candidates or is the media just blindly throwing something out there on a slow news day?

  • In reply to lets go cubs:

    Agreed. The only thing that matters is they pick the right guy for the team. If he turns out to be the guy who develops prospects and helps develop this team, then fans are going to like him -- especially once they start winning.

    I think they worst thing they can do is try and please the fans. If it's not their guy and they wind up losing, it's not like the fans aren't going to be angry anyway. Pick the guy you want because the only thing that matters is getting the guy who will lead the Cubs to the next level.

  • Hello John, I know that this one might be a stretch, but has anyone maybe talked to Jim Riggleman again? I wish there were some Billy Martin type managers out there. Ones that aren't afraid to tell the players who's boss, or go out to the Ump and kick some dirt or throw a base or two, LOL I too feel we're going to need a manager that's Bi-lingual, and one that is gonna be great instructing to the young kids that will be up either next year or two.

  • In reply to LRCCubsFan:

    Not that I know of on Riggleman but bilingual ability will definitely be a key -- if not the manager himself, then certainly a good portion of the staff.

  • Please don't take this the wrong way, but having a non-Hispanic
    speaking Spanish to a player is not going to do it.

  • Me and M Canter have already figured it out, its that filthy animal Varitek , Schilling will be his pitching coach and captain caveman Johnny Damon bench coach . Neifi Perez batting coach and staff linguist. Now that's a staff to get excited over !

  • In reply to Bryan Craven:

    I knew I was missing someone. Wanted to add him too. Long shot probably but an interesting name.

  • In reply to Bryan Craven:

    And I know you're kidding about Perez, but Varitek is the only interesting one to me in that group.

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    serious on Varitek , rest kidding of course, seriously the rest of the names to me are blah, Theo said dynamic, well Varitek would be dynamic and that guy is just a winner. Hire a Spanish speaking bench coach and call it a day already.

  • In reply to Bryan Craven:

    I think Varitek is interesting but in all honesty I would be very surprised. The preference is still for a Spanish speaking manager, though they won't pass over a better candidate for that. Right now there are a lot of good Latin American candidates to choose from. It'd be hard to justify picking Varitek over someone like Renteria when Renteria is such a good fit aside from being bilingual and has a lot more experience. The same goes for someone like Manny Acta, who still hasn't gotten a fair shake. And if you're going to go outside the box for a non-bilingual candidate, it's hard to look past A.J. Hinch and Brad Ausmus first.

    Just don't think Varitek is a realistic choice -- but if you guys are right on this, I'll give you guys full credit!

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    dont forget the press conference intro in the nacho libre mask to unveil the now " Mystery Man" lol. I want a winner that energizes the team i could care less what language , color ect the manager is. Hence Varitek as my choice . A Latin speaking bench coach would be sufficient plus as many years Varitek has played he probably knows some Spanish .

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Bryan Craven:

    I have read a lot a great things about Varitek, and I have liked him since about 14 seconds after they launched Sveum.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Bryan Craven:

    That's funny!

  • Why hasn't anyone brought up the name Bob Brenly?
    I think he would be an excellent choice.

  • In reply to HVACBOB:

    Zero chance it's Brenly.

  • fb_avatar

    John,

    Could the unknowns possibly be anybody already in the Cubs organization?

  • In reply to Michael Canter:

    No Wittenmeyer ruled that out in the blocked quote above.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to John Arguello:

    I meant lower levels. I don't think anybody on the major league staff would make a good manager.

  • In reply to Michael Canter:

    I don't believe they're considering anyone from the organization at all.

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    I don't think t by e FO wants to disrupt the good work going on in the minors.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to 44slug:

    Excellent point. I'd think whomever is most responsible for turning Junior Lake around at least deserves to be considered.

  • In reply to 44slug:

    I agree.

  • Why not Ozzie? He checks all the box's, please not another 'bump on the log ' personality, would like a mgr
    with some character.

  • Will the mystery manager please step out from behind the curtain.Hate to say it, but this managerial hire seems to almost be an annual thing,.I'm like the majority here who post that,we want to move on to player acquisition, and see a team put together that can compete well enough to keep the fans coming to the "ol ballyard." At present we're at least another 2-3 years before we put fear into our baseball foes.

  • Can't get any confirmation on names but the sense I'm getting is that it won't be a big surprise candidate.

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    As far as the mystery candidates, I mean. Won't be some guy that comes out of nowhere.

  • Tommy Lasorda speaks Spanish. Just throwin' that out there.

  • Just did an update. Per Patrick Mooney of CSN a few more guys, including Tony Pena and Jason Varitek, have been ruled out.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to John Arguello:

    I knew in my heart Varitek wasn't under consideration. But I still harbor hopes.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to John Arguello:

    Love this quote by Mooney: One National League official doubted the Cubs could go with a total newbie after firing Sveum and Mike Quade. Both had only managed in the big leagues on an interim basis before running what Epstein has called “the gauntlet.”

  • In reply to Michael Canter:

    Mooney is almost always spot on. Makes you think Acta and Hinch still have a shot.

  • fb_avatar

    All of these articles can be summed up with one main theme. No one knows anything about what this FO is going to do. From how this was portrayed in the media weeks ago, it appeared that Acta or Hinch were going to be named anyday. If it was that simple, I believe that they would have been selected already.

    Just because the FO is looking elsewhere doesn't mean the media had anything to do with that decision. The FO is also privy to information that none of us are. Everyone is looking too far into each sneeze and cough of this FO. Honestly, I'm not thrilled with Acta or Hinch. And Hinch likely wants to be a GM one day anyway.

  • In reply to the real alman:

    Nobody is inside the Cubs process. None of those guys are talking. I imagine most are doing what I'm doing, talking to industry sources and/or team sources not involved in the decision process. But we named 5 candidates early on and 3 of them are on the list (Acta, Hinch, Lovullo). I also named 5 more that were talked about but I concluded that maybe not the right fit(Martinez, Wedge). So, are we in the dark as far as what the Cubs FO is thinking? Pretty much. Do we have no idea? No, and I think we've shown we have a ballpark idea of what the Cubs were looking for.

  • fb_avatar

    I believe I know where SKMD was coming from, and he appears to be correct. Obviously he has to be correct as this search has expanded. Everyone thought Act and Hinch were the short list. Then Renteria, then Martinez, then....yadda yadda yadda.

    If any of us had disagreed with every media source up to this date about who was "likely" to be named the new manager, that person would have been right 100% of the time up to now. Each "favorite" changes day to day. Can we just stop focusing on having to be the first person to get out the latest info on this matter? These rumors aren't news. They're just one person's sources put up against a nonstopping end of other sources.

    Until I read something that came from this FO, I will disregard every report about "favorites," and just sit back and wait for the articles about the draft, trades, and free agents. That's at least fun. This ridiculous need to be the first to come out with a snippit of info that turns out to be false just to be able to say one was the first to say it has grown tiresome.

  • In reply to the real alman:

    I agree. It has come to the point that I am just perusing all of these articles. Even people voicing their opinion on who they want have absolutely no clue as to what that candidate actually brings to the table.

    I wish they would name someone, anyone, soon so we can get on with it. I am tired of people in the know and with sources giving us updates that are either speculation, made up or just plain wrong (not directed at you John).

  • fb_avatar

    The rats at Wrigley would not stand for Ozzie as manager

  • In reply to Pooch7171:

    Agree!

    Hiring Ozzie Guillen would be like hiring a Spanish-speaking Bobby Valentine. Bobby Valentine is all about Bobby. Ultimately, that is what Bobby "brings to the table". Ozzie Guillen is all about Ozzie. That is what Ozzie "brings to the table". The Cubs players and the Cubs fans need so much more than that.

  • In reply to Tinker Evers Chance:

    The next Cubs manager is probably really busy right now, traveling from Boston to St. Louis. The Cubs FO just has to wait a little while before he's free to talk. He might be a good one.

    Unfortunately, that someone is not Yadier Molina. That guy is going to be a manager someday. You can see it just by watching him work with those young Cardinals pitchers, how he interacts with them.

  • fb_avatar

    Peter Gammons told Mully and David haugh that the Cubs have interviewed Eric Wedge

  • Well we can safely take Matt Williams off our mystery list

  • Mystery Candidate #1 appears to be Eric Wedge...

  • OK, someone please start talking about how great Eric Wedge would be. I'm not feeling terribly inspired by this news.

    774-846 over 10 seasons doesn't get my motor started. I need a jump. It just tells me that he's had 10 complete seasons without getting it right.

  • In reply to Tinker Evers Chance:

    Just wrote up on him. New article out.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to John Arguello:

    Just wanted to say that my comments were aimed at reporters like Bob Nightengale who I believe just throw poop against the wall and hope it sticks.

Leave a comment